• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Explosions at the Brussels Airport

Interesting word, this one.

Question for the moral equivalency types: did you watch the video I linked? The one with the toddler covered in her own mother's blood, crying? Do you want to talk about the potty law, or that?

Please possess the courage that this administration lacks and call this shit what it actually is.

I have no problem personally stating that Islam as practiced in most countries is a backwards-ass religion that directly inspires misogyny, violence, oppression and general barbarism. I think that is a true fact. Further, I think that form(s) of Islam is not compatible with Western values and that integrating practitioners thereof into Western societies is a real problem.

What I have trouble understanding is how it serves the national interest of the United States of America to make condemning Islam, much less declaring war on it or spending taxpayer dollars bombing its practitioners, the official foreign policy stance of United States government.

No problem with Paragraph 2, and borderline crestfallen at how little agreement there seems to be on Paragraph 1.

See, this is confusing to me. You appear to think the Obama administration lacks courage to do something. What exactly? Do you want the foreign policy of the US to involve loudly condemning Islam as a whole and telling the majority of its 1.4 billion practitioners to get their collective heads out of their medieval asses? If so, how does that square with your agreement to my paragraph 2? You post these positions all the time - namely, that somehow the Obama administration is a bunch of pussies who won't man up and take on Islam, but at the same time you also state repeatedly you want the US out of the Mideast. It's curious, to say the least.
 
See, this is confusing to me. You appear to think the Obama administration lacks courage to do something. What exactly? Do you want the foreign policy of the US to involve loudly condemning Islam as a whole and telling the majority of its 1.4 billion practitioners to get their collective heads out of their medieval asses? If so, how does that square with your agreement to my paragraph 2? You post these positions all the time - namely, that somehow the Obama administration is a bunch of pussies who won't man up and take on Islam, but at the same time you also state repeatedly you want the US out of the Mideast. It's curious, to say the least.

Let me help: Neither you, I nor even Numbers (not yet, anyway) is the President. What we, in our nonceremonial capacities, think and say does not speak for the national policy of this Country. We should be able to call this shit for the garbage it is, without having to lump in Buddhists, the Amish and left-handed Presbyterians. This is a primarily Islam problem. You are brave enough to agree. ITC can't distinguish between hearing a Christian prayer at a graduation and the Boston Bombers targeting a child cheering on his father. That's the shit that we, as presumably thinking people, need to knock off.

The President has to walk a finer line, but he's running from it. We don't get the "If one of my children was flying internationally, they'd look like the blood-covered toddler in that airport" speech. We save that one for the permissible bad guy. There is a space between "Bomb until they convert to not crazy" and "Meh? Whadyagonnado?" He's forfeited that leadership opportunity.
 
I don't think we face nearly as big a problem as what Europe is facing. Most of the Muslims we let in tend to be better educated, less backwards, and do a much better job of integrating once they get here. But if we have another major terrorist attack around November, I think it will benefit Trump. When people are angry, Trump's rhetoric speaks to them. I know most on here are gonna say the opposite, that in times of crisis people want someone who speaks in measured tones, but I remember Reagan's tough talk and how people ate it up. He made the Dems look like wimps.
 
I'd like to know what Trump plans to do about the 10,000 american children who are accidentally injured or killed by guns every year. How does Trump plan to keep American children safe from guns?
 
I'd like to know what Trump plans to do about the 10,000 american children who are accidentally injured or killed by guns every year. How does Trump plan to keep American children safe from guns?

10,000 kids are accidentally injured or killed by guns every year? That's a stunning figure and I'm skeptical but maybe it's accurate. There are a ton of guns out there. Also a ton of irresponsible gun owners. What has Obama done about these kids and what does Hillary plan to do?
 
Let me help: Neither you, I nor even Numbers (not yet, anyway) is the President. What we, in our nonceremonial capacities, think and say does not speak for the national policy of this Country. We should be able to call this shit for the garbage it is, without having to lump in Buddhists, the Amish and left-handed Presbyterians. This is a primarily Islam problem. You are brave enough to agree. ITC can't distinguish between hearing a Christian prayer at a graduation and the Boston Bombers targeting a child cheering on his father. That's the shit that we, as presumably thinking people, need to knock off.

The President has to walk a finer line, but he's running from it. We don't get the "If one of my children was flying internationally, they'd look like the blood-covered toddler in that airport" speech. We save that one for the permissible bad guy. There is a space between "Bomb until they convert to not crazy" and "Meh? Whadyagonnado?" He's forfeited that leadership opportunity.

let me state unequivocally my position because the conservatives and Christians are (characteristically) being babies about their feelings being hurt:

Yes, there are people of all religions who choose to act responsibly and do good as part of practicing a religious life. I think that on the cosmic scales, organized religion is a huge negative for humanity. the harnessing of human emotion has been and is too often leveraged by clever leaders and unknowing fools for negative ends.

I also acknowledge there are levels of negativity associated with different religions, both temporally and regionally/culturally. Yes, it's worse that Saudis oppress their women more than other Islamic nations and ISIS murders everyone but that doesn't mean whatever-version of Christianity in the US gets a pass because most of its influence focuses on oppression of other types.

Religion has no place being at the forefront of policy creation. If you can't live your life without your arbitrarily chosen or birth-inherited ancient document telling you how to act, I feel sad for you.
 
I'm cool with the US taking in women and children Syrian refugees as well as nuclear families. Single adult males, nope.
 
so, you don't think that allowing discrimination against gays and trans people is related to the "religious freedom" issue? huh.

In an unrelated matter but figured you might be interested, I have several bridges for sale, some of them in up and coming neighborhoods.

I don't believe it is discrimination but rather common sense. Any individual can claim to be transgender and use any public restroom they desire for any reason, ill intended or not. You don't have a problem with that but most Americans do.
 
I'm fairly sure that I see at least one women a month in the men's bathroom at a bar or restaurant because of the line situation.

Good to know I can call the cops on that B the next time it happens. Peeing is hard enough with only dudes judging you.
 
I don't believe it is discrimination but rather common sense. Any individual can claim to be transgender and use any public restroom they desire for any reason, ill intended or not. You don't have a problem with that but most Americans do.

So your discomfort is more important than my ambivalence and college students wanting safe spaces are the pussies?
 
I'm fairly sure that I see at least one women a month in the men's bathroom at a bar or restaurant because of the line situation.

Good to know I can call the cops on that B the next time it happens. Peeing is hard enough with only dudes judging you.

You sure that isn't the once a month you stumble into the she-tter?
 
let me state unequivocally my position because the conservatives and Christians are (characteristically) being babies about their feelings being hurt:

***

Remember that time Christians shot up a building of unarmed civilians because somebody drew a picture of their God in a cartoon? Good times.
 
I don't believe it is discrimination but rather common sense. Any individual can claim to be transgender and use any public restroom they desire for any reason, ill intended or not. You don't have a problem with that but most Americans do.

You honestly believe that a potential trespassing charge is the dam holding back a sexual predator from abusing folks? Think about that for a second. You seriously believe that?
 
You honestly believe that closing a gun show loophole is the dam holding back a deranged serial killer from shooting folks? Think about that for a second. You seriously believe that?

Both sides do this. For instance...
 
10,000 kids are accidentally injured or killed by guns every year? That's a stunning figure and I'm skeptical but maybe it's accurate. There are a ton of guns out there. Also a ton of irresponsible gun owners. What has Obama done about these kids and what does Hillary plan to do?
Kids aged up to 20, yes. As for you asking what Obama has done about this, I hope you aren't serious. My point is that we should be much more concerned about American youth being killed by gun violence, yet the same people who ignore these deaths are the ones who talk about starting another ground war or nuking ISIS. It's fucking stupid. The assholes who strap up to defend Dylan Bundy or patrol the border don't give a flying fuck about the toddler that shoots and kills his father, or the kid that shoots his mother in the back while riding in the car.
http://news.yale.edu/2014/01/27/aft...ons-firearm-injuries-prevalent-among-children

http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/the-toll-gun-violence-children


"...Over 7,000 children are hospitalized or killed due to gun violence every year, according to a new study published in the medical journal Pediatrics. An additional 3,000 children die from gun injuries before making it to the hospital, bringing the total number of injured or killed adolescents to 10,000 each year..."
 
So your discomfort is more important than my ambivalence and college students wanting safe spaces are the pussies?

For me personally, I don't care which restroom a transgender person uses. My issue with it primarily has to do with people who are not transgender using this as an excuse to be a pervert. Since you brought up "safe spaces", does your support for "safe spaces" on college campuses also include Christian and or conservative students? Seems as if you and most college campuses pick and choose who is allowed a "safe space" and who should be ridiculed. Or perhaps I do not understand the correct definition of "safe spaces".

"A Safe Space is a place where anyone can relax and be able to fully express, without fear of being made to feel uncomfortable, unwelcome, or unsafe on account of biological sex, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, cultural background, religious affiliation, age, or physical or mental ..."

Do you think some people would be uncomfortable with a person of the opposite biological sex in the same restroom as them or does their comfort not count in your definition of "safe spaces"?
 
Last edited:
For me personally, I don't care which restroom a transgender person uses. My issue with it simply has to do with people who are not transgender using this as an excuse to be a pervert. Does your support for "safe spaces" on college campuses also include Christian and or conservative students? Seems as if you and most college campuses pick and choose who is allowed a "safe space" and who should be ridiculed. Or perhaps I do not understand the correct definition of "safe spaces".

"A Safe Space is a place where anyone can relax and be able to fully express, without fear of being made to feel uncomfortable, unwelcome, or unsafe on account of biological sex, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, cultural background, religious affiliation, age, or physical or mental ..."

Can someone be a pervert in the bathroom or locker room of their same gender/sex?
 
Back
Top